Breast cancer detection using double reading of unenhanced MRI including Tl-weighted, T2-weighted STIR, and diffusion-weighted imaging: A proof of concept study

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 203, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 674-681

  Trimboli, Rubina M ^a   Verardi, Nicola ^a   Cartia, Francesco ^b   Carbonaro, Luca A ^a   Sardanelli, Francesco ^a,b  

^a IRCCS POLICLINICO SAN DONATO   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Diffusion weighted imaging (DWl); Double reading; MRI; Sensitivity; Specificity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DOUBLE READING; ECHO PLANAR DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; T1 WEIGHTED GRADIENT ECHO IMAGING; T2 WEIGHTED STIR IMAGING; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED IMAGING (DWI); IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PILOT STUDY; SENSITIVITY; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; SPECIFICITY; VERY ELDERLY;

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

BREAST CANCER; DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED IMAGING (DWI); DOUBLE READING; MRI; SENSITIVITY; SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PILOT PROJECTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD;

EID: 84907877658     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.11816     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (41)

1. Heywang SH, Hahn D, Schmidl H, el al. MR imaging of ihe breast using gadolinium-DTPA. J Compul Assist Tomogr 1986; 10:199-204
2. Peters NH, Bore Rinkes III, Zuilhoff NP, et al. Meta-analysis of MR imaging in Ihe diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 2008; 246:116-124
3. Saslow D, lioetes C, Burke W, et al.; American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Croup. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer.J Clin 2007; 57:75-89
4. Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, BoetesC. Breasl MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 2008; 18:1307-1318
5. Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breasl ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 2010; 7:18-27
6. Sarclanelli Boetes C, Borisch B, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:1296-1316
7. Menell Jll, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, et al. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2005; 11:382-390
8. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, et al. MRI for diagnosis ot pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. / .ancet 2007; 370:485-492
9. Sardanelli E, Podo F, Santoro F, et al., High Breasl Cancer Risk Italian I (HIBCRIT-I) Study. Multi-center surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the High Breasl Cancer Risk Italian I study): final results. Invest Radiol 2011; 46:94-105
10. Segal AJ, Bush WH Jr. Avoidable errors in dealing with anaphylactoid reactions to iodinated contrast media. Invest Radiol 2011; 46:147-151
11. Nicholas BA, Vricella GJ, Smith M, et al. Contrast-induced nephropathy and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: minimizing the risk. Can J Urol 2012; 19:6074-6080
12. Sardanelli F. Evidence-based radiology and iis relationship with quality, In: Abujudeh I III, Bruno MA, eds. Quality ami safely in radiology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012:256-290
13. Fischer DR. Wurdinger S, Hoettcher J, Malich A, Kaiser WA. Further signs in the evaluation ot magnetic resonance mammography: a retrospective study. Invest Radial 2005; 40:430-435
14. Kuroki-Suzuki S, Kuroki Y. Nasu K.elal. Detecting breast cancer with non-contrast MR imaging: combining diffusion-weighted and STIR imaging. Magn Reson MedSci 2007; 6:21-27
15. Kaiser W. Signs in MR-mammography. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 2009
16. Trimholi RM, Carbonaro LA, Cartia F, Di Leo G, Sardanelli F. MRI of fat necrosis of the breast: the "black hole" sign at short lau inversion recovery. Eur J Radial 2012; 81:e573-e579
17. Woodhams R, Ramadan S, Stanwell P. et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast: principles and clinical applications. RadioGraphics 2011; 31:1059-1084
18. Baltzer PA, Benndorf M, Dietzel M, el al. Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions. Eur Radiol 2010; 20:1101-1110
19. Yabuuchi H, Malsuo Y, Sunami S, el al. Detection of non-palpable breast cancer in asymptomatic women by using unenhanced diffusion-weighted and T2-weighled MR imaging: comparison with mammography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2011; 21:11-17
20. Harvey SC. Geller B, Oppenheimer RG. et al. Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. AJR 2003; 180:1461-1467
21. Warren RM. Pointon L, Thompson D, el al.; UK Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Screening (MARIBS) Study Group. Reading protocol for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast: sensitivity and specificity analysis. Radiology 2005: 236:779-788
22. American College of Radiology (ACR) Bl-RADS-MRI. Breast imaging reporting and data system atlas (Bl-RADS atlas). Reslon. VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
23. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33:159-174
24. Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, et al. MR imaging of inlravoxel incoherent motions: application lo diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 1986; 161:401-407
25. Englander SA. Ulug AM. Brem R, Glickson JD, van Zijl PC. Diffusion imaging of human breast. NMR Blomed 1997; 10:348-352
26. Woodhams R, Kakila S, Hata H. el al. Identification of residual breast carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: diffusion-weighted imaging-comparison with contrast-enhanced MR imaging ami pathologic findings. Radiology 2010; 254:357-366
27. Chen X, Li WL, Zhang YL, el al. Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. IIMC Cancer 2010; 10:693
28. Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007; 244:356-378
29. Rahbar H. Partridge SC, Eby PR, el al. Characterization of ductal carcinoma in situ on diffusion weighted breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2011; 21:2011-2019
30. Imamura T, Isomoto I, Sueyoshi E, et al. Diagnostic performance of ADC for non-mass-like breast lesions on MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 2010;9:217-225
31. Delfaut EM, Bellran J, Johnson G, et al. Fal suppression in MR imaging: techniques and pitfalls. RadioGraphics 1999; 19:373-382
32. Kuhl CK, Klaschik S, Mielcarek P, et al. Do T2weighled pulse sequences help with the differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions in dynamic breast MRI7 J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9:187-196
33. BydderGM. Young IR. MR imaging: clinical use of the inversion recovery sequence. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1985; 9:659-675
34. Burdctte JH. Elster AD. Ricci PE. Acute cerebral infarction: quantification of spin-density and 12 shine-through phenomena on diffusion-weighted MR images. Radiology 1999; 212:333-339
35. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, llendrick E, et al., Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DM1STI Investigators Group, Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography lor breast-cancer screening. M Engl J Med 2005: 353:1773-1783
36. Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C, et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis: fourth edition-summary document. Ann Oncol 2008; 19:614-622
37. European Reference Organisation for Quality Assured Breast Screening and Diagnostic Services website. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis: EUREF 2006. www.euref.org/eiiropcan-guidelines/4lh-edition. Accessed August 19, 2013
38. Sardanelli F, Di Leo G. Biostatlstics for radiologists. Milan. Italy: Springer. 2009
39. Rciss-Zimmermann M, Gutherlet M, Kiistler II, Fritzsch D, Hoffmann KT. Improvement of SNR and acquisition acceleration using a 32-channel head coil compared to a 12-channel head coil at 3T. Acta Radiol 2013; 54:702-708
40. Rahbar H, Partridge SC, DcMartini WB, Thurst-en B, Lehman CD. Clinical and technical considerations for high quality breast MRI at 3 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 37:778-790
41. Wilmes LJ. McLaughlin RL. Newitt DC, et al. High-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging for moniioring breast cancer treatment response. Acad Radiol 2013; 20:581-589